But the existence of these special perks, benefits that we in the
private sector can barely comprehend in the year 2018, points to a
fundamental disconnect between the private and public sector.

Why
shouldn't someone whose benefits consist of 401(k) account accruals
believe that government pensions work so differently as to punish
someone arbitrarily by removing their benefits? Add to this the fact
thatretirement at age 50 is well-nigh incomprehensible for the average
working American, except perhaps in the case of high-risk,
health-sapping occupations, which surely likewise added to
the impression that actual pensions, rather than generous ancillary
provisions, were being lost.Yes, the rationale for these generous pension benefits is that these
civil servants accept significantly lower salaries than they would be
able to earn in the private sector. But this exchange of "low salaries
now, rich retirement benefits later" is a matter of "robbing Peter to
pay Paul" that isn't wise in the long term, either.

In addition, according to a helpful twitter exchange, the particular
nature of McCabe's pension benefits condition age-50 retirement
eligibility on primary law enforcement employment, not just
general federal government employment, at age 50; what's more, being
terminated "for cause" wholly eliminates eligibility for special age-50
retirement, according to 5 U.S.C. § 8412."

"(Note that this column is based on the information available to
me; if any part of it proves incorrect, I will update as needed. If you
wish to comment, please visit janetheactuary.com)"